Daily Mail Readers.

[ford prefect]

I have noticed a disturbing trend on here of people quoting from or claiming to read the Daily Mail!

What are you people thinking? Lord Rathmore, was not only a friend to Benito Mussolini and Adolf Hitler, but he also spent many years using his rag to promote nazi sympathies and ideals in Britain.

Having occasionally glanced at it when it has been lying around at work ect, it seems little has changed. Don't misunderstand me, I am fully aware that every paper seems to have a political bent, but the Daily Mail is so obviously a propaganda machine for some out of date right wing politics that the last time I read it and it was spouting nonsense about all immigrants being poor, diseased riddled, drug dealing rapists, it made me cringe!

 

[Ch3tan]

Poor nath.

also, on a few people post Daily Mail links, mostly as a piss take. There are probably two people on the forum, one of them in OT who actually post stories from there as gospel and express outrage.

So, I think you've missed the joke. Or I have, and this is an elaborate poke at nath

 

[Turamber]

I find it a good read. I don't often pick up a newspaper but if I'm travelling it is the one I'd go for. Yes there are often annoying viewpoints in there (its crusade against heavy rock and metal in the 80's was embarrasing) but more often than not there are some excellent articles in there.

 

[ECA]

My parents used to get the mail until I pointed out how full of Diana + OMGTHEIMMIGRINTS ARE COMIN and I made them switch to the telegraph.

 

[nath]

Oh for Pete's sake.


FFS, I just noticed some tosser changed my title. I just bought that fucker!

 

[Aada]

I never knew that people cared so much about what paper people read.

 

[Ch3tan]

oh for pete's sake.


Ffs, i just noticed some tosser changed my title. I just bought that fucker!

hahahahahahahahahahahaha

 

[Deebs]

If the truth be known I would pick up the Daily Mail over any other newspaper. Find some of the articles quite good.

For the record Chet, what paper do you read again? Apart from the Man United Post (which spouts endless shit about how good Shrek aka Rooney is).

 

[Ch3tan]

I don't, I'll check out stories linked from places on the net, but I don't check any newspaper on a regular basis nor their websites.

 

[Jupitus]

Oh for Pete's sake.


FFS, I just noticed some tosser changed my title. I just bought that fucker!

Heh

 

[megadave]

Where are these good articles? I've yet to see one.

 

[old.user4556]

Typically the Torygraph for me; sometimes The Glasgow Herald. The Scotsman is toilet paper.

 

[Mabs]

I never knew that people cared so much about what paper people read.

sorry, you seem to be confused

were talking about The Daily Mail, your talking about newspapers, entirely different thing

 

[Edmond]

How do you confuse a Daily Mail reader?


Tell them that immigrants kill black pedophiles

 

[Ch3tan]

Fantastic Ed

 

[Fweddy]

I get all my news from the Daily Mash.

 

[Scouse]

I never knew that people cared so much about what paper people read.

Says a lot about you.

In general, people like to read stuff that reflects them, not stuff that challenges them.



Caught my sister reading the mail the other day, unfortunately. My auntie often quotes the fail - but then she hates n1ggers and is scared of immigrants (taking all our jobs). My mum votes Labour and reads the daily fucking mirror.

I feel like Rita from Educating Rita when I go home



Edit: And yep, nice Ed!

 

[Zenith.UK]

I don't read newspapers any more.
Online newswires are better IMO at getting across the facts of news without too much filtering or bias. To get rid of as much bias as possible, you need to read the same report from a number of sources.
For example, 32 people including 6 MPs were killed in a hotel in Mogadishu according to the BBC. It didn't even rate a main headline placement, it was one of the minor headline items on the World section. [source here]
Xinhua, the Chinese news agency have it as their #1 headline item and say it was 31 people (including 6 MPs) and they have a bare narrative of known facts at the time of writing. [source here]

The difference between the 2 reports is stark, obvious and quite frankly worrying. The chinese report is the epitome of impartiality compared to the BBC report which has a definite anti-islamist tone.

 

[nath]

There's a good argument to be made as to why reduced sales of newspapers is going to seriously reduce the quality of news. David Simon an interesting lecture at USC Law here:

YouTube - "The Wire" creator David Simon: Journalists & the Public Squ

The main thrust of the argument is that unless online news sites are subscription based including a small fee, there's never going to be enough money generated from advertising to fund decent journalism. He also points out that the argument for bloggers being a good source of news is also pretty insulting as a journalist given that it's a craft that he's studied.

It's long, but I'd recommend that vid, it's very interesting.

 

[ECA]

Of course a journalist is going to say that.
The wages across the industry have been falling in response to falling revenues due to the internet.

I'm sure they'd love to go back to the days when it was a respected profession instead of just hiring people out of uni, paying them shit and not giving them payrises because you can't turn a profit.

It isn't going to happen though. National news organisations that are subsidised and provide free content ( beeb comes to mind ) will bury any attempts at charging for news access online.

Niche papers ( the economist ) and magazines will survive but the traditional newspapers have big profitability issues right now.

 

[nath]

Of course a journalist is going to say that.
The wages across the industry have been falling in response to falling revenues due to the internet.

*Ex-journalist, and it doesn't mean he's wrong. And yeah, I don't see how things could improve. The Times has moved to a subscription only service and perhaps others will follow suit. Of course, all that means is they'd have more revenue, who knows if journalism would improve as a result. I guess the question is, are people willing to pay for good journalism if it's available?

 

[DaGaffer]

*Ex-journalist, and it doesn't mean he's wrong. And yeah, I don't see how things could improve. The Times has moved to a subscription only service and perhaps others will follow suit. Of course, all that means is they'd have more revenue, who knows if journalism would improve as a result. I guess the question is, are people willing to pay for good journalism if it's available?

Simple answer? No. And its a big problem. For all the criticism of the Daily Mail (and I'd be right at the front of that queue), the UK in particular has had a vibrant and hugely valuable press for centuries, its been one of the great counterweights to the tendency of governments to oppress their "citizens", and now its on the way out, and no, bloggers don't represent a satisfactory alternative; there are some great bloggers out there, but they don't necessarily have the resources for lots of news categories, and tend to be commentators on other primary sources anyway (Wikileaks is very much an exception).

On the other hand, its probably worth pointing out that readers never really bought newspapers for the news; local papers were actually bought for the classifieds, national papers were bought primarily for their portability (a thing to do on the bus), both of which online is killing (portability still isn't quite there from an experience pov, but it will be within a year or two). So when Murdoch throws up a paywall, he's doing it around the content that people didn't really buy in the first place (the sizzle not the sausage).

 

[Jiggs]

TV&Showbiz | Mail Online

This section is the only one worth reading. The articles are all written from the perspective of an outraged retired colonel's wife with lingering menopause-hormone issues.

Excellent.

 

[Scouse]

I guess the question is, are people willing to pay for good journalism if it's available?

I'd counter with the question: Has 'good' journalism ever been available?


Every single time I've had direct exposure to a news item I've found that every single news outlet has got it wrong. To varying degrees, sure, but they've never got it right.

Also - how can we tell if they're not just making the news up without first-hand experience?

I'd argue that getting your news from bloggers is no more dangerous or inaccurate than getting it from a well-respected news source. The vast majority of them won't have the pressure of them having to spice it up or be sensationalist 'cause they won't be making a living out of it...

 

[Chilly]

I buy it every day

 

[Mabs]

He also points out that the argument for bloggers being a good source of news is also pretty insulting as a journalist given that it's a craft that he's studied.

wars, famine, earthquakes..
whats on the front of the paper ?

OH NO! SOMEONE IN EASTENDERS HAS DIED!

i find -THAT- insulting

 

[ford prefect]

Frankly, the Daily Mail should be forced to add "This content of this journal are fictionalised and any resemblance to real life events are purely coincidental"

and

"The Paper that openly supported the Nazi cause"

or how about

"The paper that would like to abort gay babies!" after the classic "Abortion hope after 'gay genes' finding"

and lets not forget

"Stephen Gately, hmm, obviously he is dead because of drink, drugs and aids and being far too gay for his own good, let that be a lesson to our young".

The only laudable thing I think I can ever remember them doing is supporting the Stephen Lawrence campaign, but even then through their rediculous action of naming five murderers, pre-trial, they nearly caused a mis-trial.

I think Stephen Fry said it best:

"How can one not be fond of something that the "Daily Mail" despises?"

I wouldn't wipe my arse with the daily mail, it would probably give you piles.

 

[Aada]

Says a lot about you.

In general, people like to read stuff that reflects them, not stuff that challenges them.



Caught my sister reading the mail the other day, unfortunately. My auntie often quotes the fail - but then she hates n1ggers and is scared of immigrants (taking all our jobs). My mum votes Labour and reads the daily fucking mirror.

I feel like Rita from Educating Rita when I go home



Edit: And yep, nice Ed!

Really?

 

[Scouse]

with ford


and really what exactly, Aada?

 

[nath]

wars, famine, earthquakes..
whats on the front of the paper ?

OH NO! SOMEONE IN EASTENDERS HAS DIED!

i find -THAT- insulting

I'm pretty sure David Simon wouldn't consider that journalism .